masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Rachni Wars
Lancer recently deleted my edit of the Mass Effect 2 section of this page where I point out that the asari you find on Illium if you spared the Rachni queen tells you that the war was orchestrated my "those that shepard now hunts" in the basis it was speculation. (im not sure about the quote but it was very similar). You will find that it is not speculation, and very much in the game. I made that edit right after I played that part, prompting me to make the edit. 01:43, July 1, 2010 (UTC) :It is indeed in the game, but aside from the capitalization issue (it's Shepard, not shepard, which is important for an article), your interpretation of the line was a bit speculative. After all, at the time, Shepard was hunting the Collectors, not the Reapers. Just throwing that out there. SpartHawg948 01:48, July 1, 2010 (UTC) ::And that was the speculation I removed. I considered keeping the line, but keeping the line, but after some condieration, it couldn't stand on its own. So it was best to remove it all. Lancer1289 01:51, July 1, 2010 (UTC) :: ::Realy? I think enough of a case has been built up throughout the games for at least a "Speculation" section of the article. Even if it is not perfectly proven I think we all know thet they are hinting at this. and if there is a speculation section then my point should be included in it. I know your attitude towards speculation, but I think this instance deserves a execption. 01:56, July 1, 2010 (UTC) ::EDIT: sorry, I misunderstod you, I thought you were saying you were planning on removing that entire bloc of text. :::No, all of the 'evidence' that has been presented is circumstantial at best, and open to interpretation. And much of the 'evidence', when taken at face value, actually would seem to work against your theory, such as this quote, as Shepard was hunting the Collectors at the time, with no knowledge of the involvement of the Reapers. SpartHawg948 02:00, July 1, 2010 (UTC) :::What i'm saying is, I think it's important, at lest in a case signifigant like this, for the information that, I admit, its open for interpretation, to be presented, even under a banner saying "Look out ahead, things that might not be true, but seem to work out when you think about them be here" so that people at least can make up their own minds.The sour tone from space, the involvment of those that shepard hunts, while they might not have anything to do with the reapers, none the less, had to do with the Rachni wars, which this page is about, and if we put that information in there, its worth noting that this sounds like the Reapers, if people don't get that. :::P.S. it's irrelevent that shepard at the time had no knowledge of the Reapers, weather he knew it was them or not, he hunted them. 02:06, July 1, 2010 (UTC) ::::Yeah, we're not really in the habit of posting stuff that isn't true, especially under the heading 'this might not be true'. I can see maybe including the raw data (i.e. the 'sour note from space' btw, is already present on the [[Rachni] page, as well as this one] and the 'Shepard hunting' bit), but not drawing any conclusions from it. ::::P.S. It isn't irrelevant. You can't hunt something if you don't know it's there. Pretty common sense, that. And, as Shepard didn't know the Reapers were involved, and was only hunting the Collectors at the time, it's mighty relevant that Shep didn't know the Reapers were involved. SpartHawg948 02:11, July 1, 2010 (UTC) :If thats that you want, but It still leaves the issue, all or nothing. The ariticle still says that the sour tone from space could be the Reapers, but not my bit. remove that, and add my bit as facutal data, or add my bit enitrely, and make it a full blown out speculation thingymajig. You can see how at the time, I was perplexed on why you delete semi-speculatory information, when the article seemed proud to flaunt it. By the way, can you teach me how to bump my text up a notch like everybody else here seems to know how to do? 02:19, July 1, 2010 (UTC) ::Because there is, quite simply, more support for the sour note bit. A sour note forcing the rachni to resonate to its melody. Sounds a lot like indoctrination (which has been described as an audible tone or noise) forcing an individual to comply with the will of a Reaper, doesn't it? On the other hand, saying that a comment concerning the enemy Shepard is hunting suggests the Reapers when at the time Shep was hunting the Collectors and had no knowledge of the Reapers is baseless speculation. One has at least some supporting evidence, the other does not. SpartHawg948 02:22, July 1, 2010 (UTC) :: ::Alright, I understand, but I don't think you understood me when I said it was irellevent. First of all, these lines come from the asari, not Shepard, so who knows what she thought he knew, or cared he knew. Like I said before, he was hunting the Reapers, wheather he knew it or not, and if he didn't know, It didn't change the facts. Secondly, he did know they were working with the Reapers. You can't get to Illium without doing Horizon, where shepard finds the Husks, he concludes they were brought there because of the lack of dragon's teeth, and even openly says that this proves there is a connection with the Reapers. 02:30, July 1, 2010 (UTC) :::Fair enough, but at the end of the day, Shep was hunting whom? The Collectors. After all, that's the entire reason Shepard was alive at that point, literally. And, for the record, I did look at integrating the hunting blurb in there, and there really isn't a way that it would mesh smoothly with the rest, so were it to be included, the entire ME2 section would need a re-write, which I don't really find necessary, since adding the hunting bit really... adds nothing substantive. And there's the issue of it contradicting one of the other statements, the one about the asari not being sure about who it was who influenced the start of the war. SpartHawg948 02:39, July 1, 2010 (UTC) ::: :::I can live with that. I just wanted the word to be known. 02:41, July 1, 2010 (UTC) Picture Instead of the (rather) blurry rachni picture, shouldn't we use the krogan statue in the Presiduim. If not that I believe the queen or a brood would serve as a better picture. --Paladin cross 17:56, December 16, 2010 (UTC) :The reason we use that image is because it's the Codex image for the rachni entry. Personally, I don't think the krogan statue would be really that appropriate, but that's just my opinion. I'm also rather opposed to using the image of the queen, as it does have some spoiler-ish implications, and when you say brood, I'm assuming you mean Brood Warrior, but I can't really see the reason to use an image of one of them. If anything, a rachni warrior (i.e. the ones who actually did most of the fighting) would be better, but honestly, I think the Codex image is our best bet. SpartHawg948 18:47, December 16, 2010 (UTC) ::I'd also have to agree, the krogan statue would be inappropiate. I might agree that one of the Brood Warriors or a Warrior might be better, but there's nothing wrong with the Codex image. Lancer1289 20:23, December 16, 2010 (UTC) but the codex picture is blurrly(sp), can we atleast get a nonblurrly picture, maybe from the cutscene when you first encounter rachni?--Paladin cross 05:09, January 11, 2011 (UTC) :Make it a non-blurry version of the Codex picture, and sure. As stated above, the Codex picture is used for a reason. SpartHawg948 05:10, January 11, 2011 (UTC) No, I meant the image used in the Codex is blurry, which is why I wanted a different pic. But if you guys think it is okay than I will defer to your wisdom.--Paladin cross 16:08, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :If you have a non-blurry version of the Codex picture, feel free to replace the current image. SpartHawg948 18:06, January 19, 2011 (UTC) NO! The image used in-game for the rachni codex image is blurry, not the one used by the wiki, but the actual In-game Codex image is blurry. It doesn't matter since you guys want to use the Codex image, and it is unlikely you can get the precise image used for the Codex photo, but I'm just clarifying a point.--Paladin cross 18:18, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :Wait the Codex image is blurry? Then what is the problem. Since we do know that the actual ingame picture is blurry, then how could we not get "the precise image", because we apparently already have it. That is just confusing as how can we get more precise than the actual, if blurry, Codex image? That is just confusing. Lancer1289 18:25, January 19, 2011 (UTC) I wanted to get a image from the first cutscene you meet rachni on Noveria, so you could get more detail of a Rachni soldier on the page, but if you guys want to use a blurry Codex image...Ok. --Paladin cross 16:13, January 20, 2011 (UTC) forgot to mention my reason for "precise". I meant the precise angle Bioware used to get the Codex image, not a better picture of the Codex photo itself.--Paladin cross 16:15, January 20, 2011 (UTC) :I would oppose that since it loses context. I would take the Codex image over that one any day. Lancer1289 18:01, January 20, 2011 (UTC) sour note in ME1 "It is postulated in Mass Effect 2 that another party, likely the Reapers, manipulated the rachni into starting the war .... the Rachni Queen's description of how her race was forced to resonate with a "sour note" is reminiscent of Reaper indoctrination." I never got the dialogue with the asari since I jumped the ME wagon with ME2, where the rachni queen is dead by default, but as I played Noveria yesterday, the mention of the "sour tone" is already there - the queen says that when she was an egg, she heard the Mother's song, and the songs of others gradually turned into a "sour yellow". It does not establish any connection to the Reapers yet but is definitely a clear hint that _something_ went amiss with the Rachni. Wouldn't it be worth adding to the article, at least as a mention that the Reaper involvement with the rachni is foreshadowed as early as ME1? --Ygrain 08:01, May 28, 2012 (UTC) Since there has been no response, I'm going through with the edit. I'd prefer it was done by someone who has actually had the ME2 scene, to avoid incorrect phrasing on my part, so, hopefully, this will serve the purpose. --Ygrain 13:24, May 31, 2012 (UTC)